Author Topic: GB, Fighter and Missile jump drives  (Read 2910 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11684
  • Thanked: 20488 times
Re: GB, Fighter and Missile jump drives
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2009, 10:13:12 PM »
Quote from: "sloanjh"
PS - Did you decide to code up the jump drive change to lower the minimum size to something small and interprete the current tech line as the minimum size needed to activate the squadron size property?
Yes, that is already in v4.8

Steve
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11684
  • Thanked: 20488 times
Re: GB, Fighter and Missile jump drives
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2009, 10:26:13 PM »
Quote from: "sloanjh"
The above just led me to think up a whole can of worms....  
    First, I was thinking that the "heavy bombardment" missiles that could be handed off to a FAC for terminal guidance would be a good thing - it would add to the complexity of trade-offs in weapons-mix decisions.

    Second, I was thinking that it would also be a good thing by allowing a planetary base to take its entire system under fire by long-range drones (assuming it had FAC GB based on it).

    Third, I just realized that the "hand off" ability might be necessary if you introduce drones.  Otherwise you've just given a huge range advantage to ships over planets - the ships can standoff outside of the planet's missile range and pound it into dust with drones.  This seems to contradict your original goal of having "bastion planets" which would be difficult to attack from space.
The hand-off idea is interesting and would reflect real life, although I think ships need specialised equipment to handle it. It could get a little messy in the interface though. I will probably look at this when I finally get around to my EW overhaul.

With regard to bombarding planets from long range. It is possible but the requirements to achieve it successfully are considerable. Firstly, if you assume size 16+ drones, then each launcher is going to require a lot of space. A cruiser with a dozen size 4 launchers would only mount 3 drone launchers and the rate of fire would be reduced by 75%. A defender would have to deal with 25% of the missiles in each salvo and just 6.25% of the total weight of fire over time. Secondly, you are probably firing blind without any real idea of the defenders. NPRs in v4.8 are aware of drones so they will be taking steps to defend their important planets against drone attack. You could expend a lot of time and effort setting up an attack with a small number of drones when a heavier weight of fire from closer in might be a lot more effective. Finally, a ship designed purely to fire drones is going to be very vulnerable when facing a regular warship. I have just starting building drones in my own campaign and then only design to use them so far has a single launcher for recon drones. Its a 10,000 ton CA with six size 4 launchers and a size 16 launcher for the drones. It carries 90 missiles and just 6 drones. Those 6 drones take up 21% of the magazine space. I will obviously listen to feedback on how they fare but with the drone engine at 0.25 HS, or 5 MSP, the sheer size of drones makes them difficult to use effectively as a weapon.

Steve
 

Offline James Patten

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • J
  • Posts: 257
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: GB, Fighter and Missile jump drives
« Reply #17 on: December 27, 2009, 03:05:19 PM »
I have an idea for the 1000x fuel 4x power slot.  How about some kind of booster engine, similar to an afterburner on a modern jet?  The ship in question gets a temporary jolt of speed.  Useful for chasing after enemies, etc.  However it uses up fuel at a fearsome rate, so you wouldn't want to be on afterburner mode all the time.

I don't know if that could be fit in with the current rules or not.
 

Offline boggo2300

  • Registered
  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 895
  • Thanked: 16 times
Re: GB, Fighter and Missile jump drives
« Reply #18 on: December 27, 2009, 04:51:00 PM »
What about reduced squadron sizes for Jump Engines (ie 2 and 1) I have a design for a smallish ship that would need a jump drive, but it operates alone, so a squadron size of 1 (with its reduced size for the jump drive, at least thats my theory) would be perfect

Matt
The boggosity of the universe tends towards maximum.